I think this discussion won't be so heated if the participants didn't have a personal experience of the states discussed. The issue is that people tend to mix the experience with it's interpretation, and then to defend this interpretation.

It's interesting how various interpretations of jhana become self-fulfilling prophecies - a person believes in a given interpretation, prectices the methods recommended, and indeed arives to the states described.

I think this discussion won't be so heated if the participants didn't have a personal experience of the states discussed. The issue is that people tend to mix the experience with it's interpretation, and then to defend this interpretation.

It's interesting how various interpretations of jhana become self-fulfilling prophecies - a person believes in a given interpretation, prectices the methods recommended, and indeed arives to the states described.

That's why the words of the Buddha are so precious to consult.

Metta, Dmytro

This all seems to be quite so.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

"Again, by passing entirely beyond bodily sensations, by the disappearance of all sense of resistance and by non-attraction to the perception of diversity, seeing that space is infinite, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of Infinite Space. In this way some perceptions arise through training, and some pass away through training."

Hi Dmytro

May I ask why rūpasaññāna above has been translated as "bodily sensations"? Who did this translation?

In your other Dhamma forum, you said this -

The relevant Suttanta passage in this regard, is one that occurs in various suttas:

“There are these five cords of sense desire:” [kàmaguna: "chords of sense desire" -- thanks piotr smile.gif ] “forms cognizable by the eye that are wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense-desire and tempting to lust. Sounds cognizable by the ear... odors cognizable by the nose... flavors cognizable by the tongue... tangibles cognizable by the body, wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense-desire and tempting to lust.” (SN XXXVI.31: Niramisa Sutta; trans. Nyanaponika Thera)

And it unmistakable that the “sensual pleasures” which are to be withdrawn from prior to entering jhana as stated in the jhana formula, are precisely these five: “forms cognizable by the eye... sounds cognizable by the ear... odors cognizable by the nose... flavors cognizable by the tongue... tangibles cognizable by the body ... that are wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense-desire and tempting to lust. And so it isn’t all forms, etc., that the meditator need to withdraw from (as stated in the jhana formula), the meditator simply needs to withdraw from those which tempt him or her, giving rise to lust, as stated here. As always, this makes perfect sense and is borne out by experience.

You may care to re-visit the Nibbedhika Sutta, AN 6.63 where the Buddha specifically injuncts the conflation of the "kāmaguṇā" with "kāmā".

There are these five kāmaguṇā. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... aromas cognizable via the nose... flavors cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. But these are not kāmā. They are called kāmaguṇā in the discipline of the noble ones.

If the "kāmā" meant only the kāmaguṇā, then we are going to end up with very bizzare situations where the kāmaguṇā, instead of giving pleasure, give only pain.

The Critical Pali Dictionary has done a very comprehensive survey and its entries on kāmā and kāmaguṇā distinguish them. The CPD follows the canonical definition of kāmaguṇā and what that leads to is the kāmaguṇā being a sub-set of the kāmā. The "kāmā" are defined simply as rūpā, saddā, gandhā, rasā and phoṭṭhabbā, all WITHOUT the adjectives.

That, IMHO, is the plain and simple meaning of kāmā in the vivicc'eva kāmehi formula of 1st Jhana.

Last edited by Sylvester on Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

I think this discussion won't be so heated if the participants didn't have a personal experience of the states discussed. The issue is that people tend to mix the experience with it's interpretation, and then to defend this interpretation.

It's interesting how various interpretations of jhana become self-fulfilling prophecies - a person believes in a given interpretation, prectices the methods recommended, and indeed arives to the states described.

That's why the words of the Buddha are so precious to consult.

Metta, Dmytro

Thank you for the kind reply Dmytro. I have no idea what other posters experience or not. Interestingly, in relation to your comment on self-fulfilling prophecies, I initially did this introspection long ago, to the end, before I ever read about buddhism at all simply because I felt compelled to do it. I was searching for my soul, having been raised by a Baptist minister who repeatedly and emphatically insisted that the eternal fate of my soul was all important which led to a great deal of anxiety and concern for it on my part. I went looking for that soul and in the process I encountered all of the above dependently conditioned mental qualities and ultimately the complete cessation of consciousness by means of concentration and insight.

It wasn't until a couple of decades later when I first began reading the Tipitaka that I discovered such eloquent descriptions of the same process. It would have been and continues to be beyond my capacities to dissect the entire process in terms of such reductive minutia but it did proceed, in terms of the jhana much as Sariputta himself described, one state to the next, and with full cognizance and discernment of what was occurring. I can only say that I find the fixation with the minutia of the descriptions of the process by the Blessed Buddha and his Sangha somewhat odd considering the relative simplicity and fluidity of the process when one is truly concerned with it as if it were a matter more pertinent than life and death, which for me, it certainly was and is.

Further, I have never felt that jhana apart from the simultaneous employment of discernment and the development of insights is of any use or interest. Nor have I ever encountered any passionate desire for remaining in jhana at any length nor for the purpose of avoiding normal day to day life or any other states of mind. Nor have I felt any need to deepen jhana to the point that there is no capacity to emerge from it at any point I would like to nor that there is any point in making a sport of entering into and out of various jhanas. I find both Ajahn Brahm''s and the Visuddhimagga's particular kinds of emphasis of jhana odd in relation to my own experience. I have always attempted to express the benefits of developing discernment and insight together with calm and concentration. As far as I have ever found, the two mental qualities are mutually supportive, mutually instructive, operate well together and together these lead to the realizations and understandings which are the expressed objectives of the Buddhadhamma.

I very much doubt that I would have arrived at cessation for the first time if I was trying to replicate some particular kind of practice technique based upon the Visudhimagga or upon the teachings of anyone else whom I have subsequently encountered with the possible exception of the instructions which are found in the Buddha's own discourses, doctrines and disciplines, which uniquely appear to be entirely direct and to the point. His directness is easily noted in retrospect however it is no less astonishing an accomplishment to subsequently encounter and an impressively comprehensive one as well.

What initially took me to the point of cessation was an intense need to know what was on the receiving end of my conscious existence. It was a great relief to discover what is actually there when consciousness ceases and in comparison everything else I do is simply passing the time peacefully until that which I did find is all that remains. Were it not for the concern for other beings that naturally arises from the gnosis that we are merely empty mechanisms for the furtherance of conditionally dependent dukkha, I would not try to communicate what I have encountered at all. It is my sincere hope that people will set aside their reasoning about methodologies and simply look skillfully, intently and exhaustively within their own bodies and minds to determine the truth of their own nature as this is the only way they can fully confirm the truth of the Buddhadhamma for themselves.

Sylvester wrote:You're still evading the elephant in the room. How is the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayabojjhanga indicated in red above different from the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayasambojjhanga in the suttas? The suttas which Dmytro and I cited clearly state that Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayasambojjhanga must have vicara, and be preceded by vitakka in Sati.

It seems this elephant is an illusion.

There's no 'must have' in the descriptions of 'dhamma-vicaya' I quote:

For example, "parivīmaṃsa" without the "vicara" would still be dhamma-vicaya.

Best wishes, Dmytro

Hi Dmytro

I read the SN 46.3 enumeration of Dhamma-vicaya as "must-haves", not enumerations of separate types of investigations, each of which will suffice individually. The Pali lists all three of pavicinati, pavicarati, and parivīmaṃsamāpajjati happening "yasmiṃ samaye" before dhammavicayasambojjhaṅga is aroused etc "tasmiṃ samaye".

I take it from the above that, unlike Geoff, you are of the position that in order to vipassati, one must have Dhamma-vicaya?

Or are you opting for his interpretation that one can vipassati without Dhamma-vicaya?

Sylvester wrote:I take it from the above that, unlike Geoff, you are of the position that in order to vipassati, one must have Dhamma-vicaya?

Or are you opting for his interpretation that one can vipassati without Dhamma-vicaya?

Another fallacious misrepresentation. I completely fail to understand what you hope to gain by misrepresenting what I've said. I've already suggested two good sources for deepening one's appreciation and understanding of the integral model of the 37 requisites of awakening. Unless there is some agreement about path structure and some basic terms like sati, sampajañña, samādhi, saññā, nimitta, and mahaggatā citta, and how these relate to the kasiṇa jhānas, the brahmavihāra jhānas, the asubha jhānas, and so on, there is little basis for meaningful discussion.

Sylvester wrote:If this indulgence in the subha nimitta of a dhamma were such a bad thing, why would the Buddha have recommended it as part of the Third Vimokkha or as the Subha Vimokkha?

Indeed, why would the Buddha have recommended it?

In fact, he never recommended it. Subha Vimokkha is related to the development of Metta.

I see the Buddha teaching a gradual Path, and if niramisa sukha is not touched, how will His disciples desire to escape samisa sukha?

There's nothing wrong with niramisa sukkha per se, if there's no attachment to it.

As to the blue point, I think the Mettasahagata Sutta is not speaking of mettabhavana. It spoke of mettasahagata. Then, it speaks of karunasahagata which leads to the attainment of Infinite Space, it speaks of muditasahagata which leads to the attainment of Infinite Consciousness, and it speaks of upekkhasahagata which leads to the attainment of Nothingness. The inference from the sequence must be that the development of the 7 Enlightenment Factors accompanied by metta leads to the Jhanas.

As to the red point, I have suggested that MN 44 makes it clear that there is no raga and no raganusaya when experiencing 1st Jhana sukha. You have opted instead for the Commentarial explanation, with which I disagree. Borrowing Ajahn Thannisaro's translation for convenience, with the key terms returned to the Pali and the key elision expanded-

"Does raganusaya anuseti with all pleasant feeling? Does patighanusaya anuseti with all painful feeling? Does avijjanusaya anuseti with all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"No, raganusaya does not anuseti with all pleasant feeling..."

"But what is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Raganusaya is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling. Patighanusaya is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling. Avijjanusaya is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"Is raganusaya to be abandoned with regard to all pleasant feeling? Is patighanusaya to be abandoned with regard to all painful feeling? Is avijjanusaya to be abandoned with regard to all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"No! ...

There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from kāmā, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With that he abandons raga. No raganusaya (latent tendency to lust) anuseti (underlies) there.

In your earlier opinion, you offered your thoughts that the passage underlined red should be read as extinction of raga through insight into 1st Jhana. This is how you read "with that"/tena. IMHO, the passage is very clear that the "tena" simply occurs at 1st Jhana, and not much later on enlightenment. The point to note is that the passage explicitly says that raganusaya does not anuseti with 1st Jhana pleasure.

If you look at how other suttas present raganusaya and how it anuseti sukha vedana, it becomes clear that raganusaya is the consequence of raga. Eg from SN 36.6 -

Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he then proceeds to enjoy sensual happiness. And why does he do so? An untaught worldling, O monks, does not know of any other escape from painful feelings except the enjoyment of sensual happiness. Then in him who enjoys sensual happiness, an underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind).

Since MN 44 explicitly states that raganusaya does not anuseti 1st Jhana's pleasure, it becomes clear that the cause of raganusaya is also absent in 1st Jhana. That, in my view, is how "Rāgaṃ tena pajahati" should be simply read.

1st Jhana is not the only place where raganusaya does not anuseti a pleasant feeling. Raganusaya is not inevitable. I've mentioned previously that MN 152 seems to imply that an instructed putthujana practising satipatthana will not be touched by raganusaya. There is another sutta in the SN (references later, if you can wait) where the sutta explicitly states that 3 anusayas do not underlie the respective feelings on the occassion when the meditator undertakes the satipatthanas correctly. The sutta was not referring to an Arahant's meditation.

Of course, MN 138 as it stands directly conflicts with the literal reading of MN 44, plus the SN satipatthana sutta I mentioned. Let's see how Ven Analayo proposes that MN 138 may have suffered a transmission error, based on his comparison of MN 138 to the Chinese MA 164. I suspect that when the analysis is offered, any inconsistency between MN 138 and MN 44 will be resolved.

Last edited by Sylvester on Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:52 am, edited 3 times in total.

Sylvester wrote:I take it from the above that, unlike Geoff, you are of the position that in order to vipassati, one must have Dhamma-vicaya?

Or are you opting for his interpretation that one can vipassati without Dhamma-vicaya?

Another fallacious misrepresentation. I completely fail to understand what you hope to gain by misrepresenting what I've said. I've already suggested two good sources for deepening one's appreciation and understanding of the integral model of the 37 requisites of awakening. Unless there is some agreement about path structure and some basic terms like sati, sampajañña, samādhi, saññā, nimitta, and mahaggatā citta, and how these relate to the kasiṇa jhānas, the brahmavihāra jhānas, the asubha jhānas, and so on, there is little basis for meaningful discussion.

All the best,

Geoff

For the 4th time, Geoff -

Do you assert that one can vipassati without the Dhammavicayasambojjhanga?

Yes or No?

Pls explain how the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayabojjhanga indicated in the Abhidhamma are different from the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayasambojjhanga in the suttas.

Where is Vajirapani when I need him?

Last edited by Sylvester on Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

I think this discussion won't be so heated if the participants didn't have a personal experience of the states discussed. The issue is that people tend to mix the experience with it's interpretation, and then to defend this interpretation.

It's interesting how various interpretations of jhana become self-fulfilling prophecies - a person believes in a given interpretation, prectices the methods recommended, and indeed arives to the states described.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Thanks, but I was thinking about the canonical one from DN 3, who should a nice chlorophyll green by Thai iconographic convention.

Alas, not to be found easily. Probably need the Thai name, but in the meantime scary Tibetan image will have to stand in.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

I can only say that I find the fixation with the minutia of the descriptions of the process by the Blessed Buddha and his Sangha somewhat odd considering the relative simplicity and fluidity of the process when one is truly concerned with it

I have never felt that jhana apart from the simultaneous employment of discernment and the development of insights is of any use or interest.

Nor have I ever encountered any passionate desire for remaining in jhana at any length nor for the purpose of avoiding normal day to day life or any other states of mind. Nor have I felt any need to deepen jhana to the point that there is no capacity to emerge from it at any point I would like to nor that there is any point in making a sport of entering into and out of various jhanas.

What initially took me to the point of cessation was an intense need to know what was on the receiving end of my conscious existence

I can only say that I find the fixation with the minutia of the descriptions of the process by the Blessed Buddha and his Sangha somewhat odd considering the relative simplicity and fluidity of the process when one is truly concerned with it

I have never felt that jhana apart from the simultaneous employment of discernment and the development of insights is of any use or interest.

Nor have I ever encountered any passionate desire for remaining in jhana at any length nor for the purpose of avoiding normal day to day life or any other states of mind. Nor have I felt any need to deepen jhana to the point that there is no capacity to emerge from it at any point I would like to nor that there is any point in making a sport of entering into and out of various jhanas.

What initially took me to the point of cessation was an intense need to know what was on the receiving end of my conscious existence

This is pertinent to my own practice. Thank-you.

In terms of the overall post mine too, although I have grave doubts about references to ones own "cessation" at all sorts of levels.

Sylvester wrote:Do you assert that one can vipassati without the Dhammavicayasambojjhanga?

Yes or No?

No. And both vipassati and the dhamma-investigation awakening factor are multifaceted. They take on different levels of meaning at different stages of insight.

Sylvester wrote:Pls explain how the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayabojjhanga indicated in the Abhidhamma are different from the Dhamma-Vicaya and Dhammavicayasambojjhanga in the suttas.

In the Abhidhamma the seven factors of awakening are all considered to be present at the time of attaining the noble path -- hence "awakening." This demonstrates the integral synthesis of awakening. And of the seven factors, dhamma-investigation is singled out as synonymous with both the faculty of discernment, and vipassanā. As already mentioned, in the Mahāniddesa dhamma-investigation is said to be synonymous with bodhi. Also, from the Milindapañha:

“By how many factors does one awaken to the truth?”

“By one, dhamma-investigation, for nothing can be understood without that.”

I can only say that I find the fixation with the minutia of the descriptions of the process by the Blessed Buddha and his Sangha somewhat odd considering the relative simplicity and fluidity of the process when one is truly concerned with it

I have never felt that jhana apart from the simultaneous employment of discernment and the development of insights is of any use or interest.

Nor have I ever encountered any passionate desire for remaining in jhana at any length nor for the purpose of avoiding normal day to day life or any other states of mind. Nor have I felt any need to deepen jhana to the point that there is no capacity to emerge from it at any point I would like to nor that there is any point in making a sport of entering into and out of various jhanas.

What initially took me to the point of cessation was an intense need to know what was on the receiving end of my conscious existence

This is pertinent to my own practice. Thank-you.

In terms of the overall post mine too, although I have grave doubts about references to ones own "cessation" at all sorts of levels.

It is refreshing not to have to argue about this in terms of any supposed status that an experience of cessation supposedly conveys upon people as I have no desire to be perceived as special or other than ordinary in any way as a consequence of having investigated this. In the past I never imagined that it would ever mean anything to anyone else for any reason and for the most part it most certainly never has meant anything to anyone I have ever known nor will it ever mean anything to anyone else in the future.

Once one discerns the pathway to the cessation of consciousness it is a replicable process and the particulars of it can be reflected upon at length. Re-observation of these dhammas and due consideration removes all doubt about the consistently anatta nature of all dependently compounded phenomena and the anatta nature of cessation and release from dependent conditions as well. The only way to determine the efficacy of the skillful means is to develop them for oneself. As such either doubt or confidence about what others have done is entirely inconsequential compared to the necessity for the determination, urgency and persistence in making a determination of the nature of the dhammas within ones dependently compounded being for oneself.

As I stated in my reply to Dmytro, I was not searching for cessation but for my soul. Having been previously been told by my father, a PhD of Theology, that my soul was neither my body nor my mind I pressed on beyond the compounded phenomena I had thus far been observing in both of these. It initially came as a complete shock to discover that there was no soul underlying the mental qualities which support consciousness and in fact nothing at all that might be considered mine or my own or anything connected or dependent in any way upon my body, senses, sensations, thoughts or mental qualities or upon the cognizable universe any way and yet something real and so inconceivably and consistently peaceful and free. There is no description or indication that can come even remotely close to doing justice to revisiting or adverting to such an experience as this directly. In comparison to the taste of full release from the dependent conditionality bound up and referred to as being and becoming, all other forms of conscious contact, including the jhanas and the formless realms, all taste like sand.

Sylvester wrote:That, IMHO, is the plain and simple meaning of kāmā in the vivicc'eva kāmehi formula of 1st Jhana.

The kāmehi refers to both the objects of sensual pleasure (vatthukāmā) and the defilements of sensual pleasure (kilesakāmā). In commentarial terms, the form portion of the "whole body" experienced in jhāna is mind-produced form which pervades the physical body. The Dīghanikāyaṭīkā:

Mind-produced form (cittajarūpa) suffuses every area where there is kamma-produced form (kammajarūpa).

There are different types of cettavimutti. Each refers to a particular meditation. Not all qualify as the four jhana in Samma Samadhi. You are using the name and description of one type of meditation to describe another. There is obviously a mix up.

For example, the description and name of akincanna cetovimutti can't be used as a synonym for adukkhamasukhaya cetovimuttiya, each describe a different meditation state. One of them qualify as Samma Samadhi the other one doesn't . Another example is animitta cetovimutti. It is not the same state as adukkhamasukhaya cetovimuttiya or the ones in Samma Samadhi.

The term samatha can includes the four jhanas as well as the formless states. The formless states are not included in Samma samadhi. The reason is that they are different than the ones in Samma samadhi.

Cetavimutti includes both Samma samadhi and formless states depending on the type. Akincanna cetovimutti describes a formless state. Adukkhamasukhaya cetovimuttiyadescribes the four form jhana. The description for the one state is not meant for the other.

Likewise , the description for mahaggatā cetovimuti is not for animitta cetovimuttior Adukkhamasukhaya cetovimuttiya. Animitta cetovimutti and mahaggata cetovimutti are specific types of cetovimutti rather than different descriptions for the same state.

When Ajahn Brahm wrote that the piti and sukha or happiness or bliss served as a glue , it means that it holds one's attention on the nimitta. That way the mind's focus is not scattered or distracted by diversity or various other things. Concentration doesn't become scattered. That is not the same as being attached to jhana. The glue holds the attention on one object, the mental object .

No body is saying that you should become attached to Jhana. This is just a misinterpretation. A person has to let go of attachment of one jhana to move to the next. There are instruction for that and for developing insight which comes after.

Dmytro wrote: There's no Pasakika sutta.

It is a typo. It's suppose to be a d . Also about the translation, there are various version of translation online. They varies. Let's look at the Pali itself.

One translator stick closely to the pali and rendered " attached and devoted to" , the other translator just rendered " devoted to" for short.

When I put "the four Jhanas " at the end because that's when the Buddha described the entire four jhanas. But instead of pasting the whole thing, I put " The four jhanas" there to shorten this post. But you should get the idea.

Dmytro wrote: As Brahmavamso writes, in his jhanas one does not comprehend what's going on.

Comprehending and awareness / being conscious are two different things. Thoughts are allowed to settle, so mental analyzing or dhamma vitakka should be left behind.

" This ATTENTIVE stillness that is able to sustain awareness on one thing is called samadhi."

" Samadhi is the attentive stillness that is able to sustain attention on one thing"